Skip to main content

About your Search

20130129
20130206
STATION
MSNBC 7
MSNBCW 7
CSPAN 4
CNN 1
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
to approve the no budget, no pay act this week as part of the debt ceiling bill. the legislation would require both the house and senate to set a budget by april 15th or members will not get paid. the house passed the measure with bipartisan support last week. i'm joined now by david walker, president of the come back america initiative and cofounder of the no labels movement, which originally proposed the no budget, no pay idea. good to see you. good morning. >> good to be with you. >> so you've pushed this no budget, no pay act since 2011, and now that it could pass this week, explain what you hope to accomplish. >> we hope to accomplish for the first time in four years, where the house, the senate, and the president will all have budgets on the table, which hopefully will facilitate a more honest and full discussion and debate about what do we need to do to put the finances of this country in order, because they're poor and deteriorating. >> do you think that people are surprised to learn that that hasn't happened? >> well, i think a lot of people are surprised to learn that there's
with this sequester, it was a total disaster for them. then they decide not to fight on the debt ceiling and they need to move the attention on to something else. say they do have leverage elsewhere. so they have chosen sequester and put up a very brave face on it. it's possible they could convince themselves to let it actually happen but the idea that they get some sort of significant political gain from it, these are cuts they hated and they hated in large part because they hurt things they care about. so to permit the sequester to go forward on that kind of rationale is not a political win, not a policy win. everybody is losing. >> the "new york times" op-ed says more than a million jobs are on the line if this deal isn't made. a quote saying the losses will soon spread as contracts to states and cities are cut, education and police grants are cut, and payments to medicare providers are cut, even the aid just approved to victims of hurricane sandy will fall under the sequester's act. americans are about to find out what happens when an entire political party demands deficit reduction at all costs b
't lose those spending cuts. that was to pay for the last debt ceiling increase, let aloney future increases. we're not interested in shutting government down. what happens on march 1, spending goes down automatically. march 27th is when the moment you're talking about, the continuing resolution expires. we are more than happy to keep spending at those levels going on into the future while we debate how to balance the budget, how to grow the economy, how to create economic opportunity. >> all right. now let's put this in context and think about what congressman ryan from wisconsin is really saying. republicans backed off their debt limit threat because they knew it was a political loser. and now they seem to be backing off their threat to shut down the government. sequester? well, that's another matter. if congress does nothing, the cuts take effect. republicans don't want defense cuts, but they might be willing to stomach those cuts because domestic programs would also get slashed, including medicare. and that's what republicans really want. let's turn to barney frank, former mass
would be that much under the debt limit. plus, the debt ceiling simply says we're not going to pay our bills. it just is illogical to say that's to pay for that. that's like going out and incurring costs which all of us did, republicans and democrats together, and then saying oh, and by the way, i'm not going to pay my bill unless you do me this enormous favor. but the other point i would make is this. he talks about, we need tax reform. the biggest single abuse in the tax code today, and it's a tough contest, is the one that says the richest people in america who run hedge funds can treat their earned income as if it were a capital gain. they call it carried interest. >> yeah. >> it means the rest of us are carrying them. and we voted to reduce that. and paul ryan boxed it. he is against that. and if you remember from that interview, he did not give a single specific about a tax break he wants to end, and he talked about cutting entitlements. >> he is up front saying no more revenue. i mean, that's their position on that. now, they've backed off the debt limit. now they're backing off
the debt ceiling in 2011. >> but they now say it was the president who is responsible. >> exactly. they voted for this. >> and paul ryan runs a marathon in less than one hour. >> i thought it was like 20 minutes. he's superman. this is what they wanted. >> of course. congressman, here is another apparent contradiction you might like to clear up for us. on the one hand, you have eric cantor out there giving a speech on making life work. he sounds like tony robbins or something. he's trying to sell yet another iteration of the republican party, but when you strip away the soft smile and the cadence, he'd happily slash every one of those programs that you just went through, wouldn't he? >> oh, absolutely. eric cantor despite all of the covering in the near is definitely proposing budgets that are hostile to middle and low income people. and particularly to vulnerable people, but not only that, you know, programs like s.n.a.p. actually give people money they can spend at the store that allows the store to hire people. eventually the programs they cut will hurt the people who are emplo
the debt ceiling. if republicans had gone into this issue and said they would not raise the debt ceiling unless they got cuts, there would have lost that the raid at the end. big loss that debate. john boehner and paul rand did a great job together. you cannot govern from that office, you but you have to be very careful about high-profile last-minute negotiations. i've worked in the white house and three administrations. the president has a tremendous institutional advantage in these kinds of fights. what republicans have to do is avoid these fights, the straps that they are laying. provide an alternative through passing legislation, just to show this is how they would govern if they had the powers of the presidency and the senate. and be careful. there are some rough edges. host: some are not strategy as far as moving the debt ceiling ahead. guest: if they had gone ahead with it, it would have been politically cataclysmic. it was the worst percival -- worst possible ground to make their point. president obama 1. i think it's absolutely crucial for the future of the country that you cann
to come out then about mid may is the extension of the debt ceiling. but come back to your answer here, is that the motivation for harry reid not to produce a budget, he doesn't want to offend people? >> they d want to produce a budget because it makes you make choices. coming out of the 2010 election he was afraid and they were afraid of loosing their majority. they ae avoided every tough issue. we hardly did anything in the senate. when you have to budget you have to make decisions you can't speak in platte taoudz. that's why they've avoided doing a budget. think their time is up. they said they are going to produce a budget this year. that's important. look what we did this paul ryan's budget and how they beat it up. that's why they didn't want to produce one of their own. bill: it's my assumption that the senate produces a budget in april and it goes to the house and they say we are not moving on that. >> the normal process begins of negotiates where the two sides have to reconcile their differences in what they call a conference. this is the way this place is supposed to work not
and whether or not to raise the debt ceiling. so here's the key actor. >> host: is he a strong leader? >> guest: i think it was much more powerful figure by the force of his personality, gingrich was a more creative thinker. boehner on the other hand understands strengths and limitations. he's a likable person. it's appropriately cautious and they think is actually that the republican party through some difficult times here in the last couple months and when i most encouraged about this the way he navigated republicans away from what would've been a disastrous debate what the president overgrazing at the ceiling. if republicans had time to this issue and said, you know, were not going to raise the debt ceiling unless at a certain amount of cuts, they would've caved in the end, would've been disastrous, much like what the fiscal cliff and i think boehner and right together did a very nice job convincing republicans that you can't govern from the house, but sure to be careful about getting into these high-profile, high-stakes, last-minute negotiations with the president. it worked in th
of this coalition. host: how did you vote on the debt ceiling issue? guest: i did vote for the no budget, no pay bill. i believe it is an important principle. i just left this weekend, handing copies out in the district. people think that we have to stop spending money that we do not have. as i mentioned, budgets are not the sexiest topic. it is difficult to get 1 million people to march on the capital because we do not have a budget, but what families, small- business owners, church leaders, school board members understand is that if you do not have a budget, you spend more. it is remarkable what has, on. in some ways the bill was a gimmick, but within a few hours patty murray held a press conference announcing that we would pass a budget this year. i think that that is vital in bringing together some sort of compromise over the course of the next several months. it is difficult to have legitimate policy discussions without numbers to look at. host: congressman luke messer, from the sixth district of indiana. woodbridge, virginia, democratic line. hello. caller: i want to address people who say
' standing strong to make sure that our view is part of this coalition. host: how did you vote on the debt ceiling issue? guest: i did vote for the no budget, no pay bill. i believe it is an important principle. i just left this weekend, handing copies out in the district. people think that we have to stop spending money that we do not have. as i mentioned, budgets are not the sexiest topic. it is difficult to get 1 million people to march on the capital because we do not have a budget, but what families, small- business owners, church leaders, school board members understand is that if you do not have a budget, you spend more. it is remarkable what has, on. in some ways the bill was a gimmick, but within a few hours patty murray held a press conference announcing that we would pass a budget this year. i think that that is vital in bringing together some sort of compromise over the course of the next several months. it is difficult to have legitimate policy discussions without numbers to look at. host: congressman luke messer, from the sixth district of indiana. woodbridge, virginia, democ
by raising the debt ceiling and that is no way to govern the country. i am hopeful that new labels will give us a way to govern the country where we start out at least bleeding in trusting the other members across the aisle have come to congress for the same reason we have. >> what can you do to bring about a more thoughtful, pragmatic congress? i want to throw out three ideas that are beyond the scope of what knolls febles has taken on. -- no labels has taken on. it was not perfect. we have 150 saved seats. they fear their primary. number two, money. and sentence. the creation of money is one of the threats to democracy. where incentivize to do crazy things. i give two examples last night. when the season the outrageous on the floor, when a republican member calls the president a liar, when a democratic member says the republican health care program is don't get sick and if you die, die quickly. those statements damage the fabric of our democracy and they raised $1 million in 24 hours. we can do about -- something about those first two. number three is the media. i am old enough to remember
. the guy who helped craft the debt ceiling plan. when he puts out that budget that is the document republicans have to run on the next two years because it has severe spending cuts on the domestic side because they have to balance the budget in ten years, a mighty task because they don't want to raise taxes. >> he has no interest in the sheer grind of campaigning. it's hard to see him having what it takes to run for president in 2016. is that even in his mind? is that a possibility for him? >> i don't think he's ever rule it out having been the veep last time and having national statutostature and i do think you have to wapt badly and willing to go for two years that state to state, talking to folks at the grassroots and i don't think he really likes that. likes the idea of spending some time with his family and work the halls of congress. the next two years are about austerity for the republican party. that would be really tough to run for president trying to partially privatize medicare and cut domestic spending across the board. >> quickly, paul ryan, does he have what it takes
on the fiscal cliff, pushed back the debt ceiling issue so that they can breathe a little bit and try and move away from just these fiscal issues. now on the horizon there are lots of house republicans, particularly younger ones, who say let's cut the defense budget, let those automatic spending cuts take place, and there are lots of senior republicans who say, not so fast. so that's going to be a problem within the republican party as we look ahead. >> where does karl rove and his new super pac fit into that? >> did you ever think republicans would call him a rhino, republican in name only. here you go. i've always thought of karl rove as a conservative. what's going on is his pac has said, you know what, we are tired of someone associated with his pac said to me, quote, the novelty of losing elections has worn off, and what they've decided to do is to start putting their money in primaries. they want to vet republican primary candidates so that by the time they get to the general election they believe they have qualified vetted candidates who can actually win. conservatives are saying, this
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)